Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

"Internal Strength" is a loose translation of the term "Nei Jin" (roughly: "Internal Trained Force Skill"). The point is that "neijin" is a very common term, so "Internal Strength" would be the closest translation that is generally suitable.

"Internal Power" I don't know anything about, but it seems to be a term that is a square peg in a round hole.

"Fa Jin" is also sometimes loosely intermixed with "Fa Li". "Fa Jin" is literally "attack jin"; "Fa Li" is literally "attack strength".... the implication in both is a *whole body shaking issuance of strength*. "Li" by itself is just the word for strength and often implies normal muscular strength.

"AiKi" implies a 'mixing of ki-strength' or a 'mixing of ki'. All strength and movement comes from ki in the body (which is interrelated with fascial strength), so a weight lifter can have 'strong ki', but he may not be able to manipulate that ki in the optimal way with his hara/middle/dantien. So if the aforementioned weight-lifter attacks someone who is skilled in 'internal strenght', there could be a mixing of forces which in turn defeats the weight-lifter. Hence, "Ai Ki".

"Internal Strength" is a loose translation of the term "Nei Jin" (roughly: "Internal Trained Force Skill"). The point is that "neijin" is a very common term, so "Internal Strength" would be the closest translation that is generally suitable.

"Internal Power" I don't know anything about, but it seems to be a term that is a square peg in a round hole.

"Fa Jin" is also sometimes loosely intermixed with "Fa Li". "Fa Jin" is literally "attack jin"; "Fa Li" is literally "attack strength".... the implication in both is a *whole body shaking issuance of strength*. "Li" by itself is just the word for strength and often implies normal muscular strength.

"AiKi" implies a 'mixing of ki-strength' or a 'mixing of ki'. All strength and movement comes from ki in the body (which is interrelated with fascial strength), so a weight lifter can have 'strong ki', but he may not be able to manipulate that ki in the optimal way with his hara/middle/dantien. So if the aforementioned weight-lifter attacks someone who is skilled in 'internal strenght', there could be a mixing of forces which in turn defeats the weight-lifter. Hence, "Ai Ki".

FWIW

Mike Sigman

I don't think that I would say "mixing" in terms of the character for "ai" - maybe "combined" would be more literally accurate...

"AiKi" implies a 'mixing of ki-strength' or a 'mixing of ki'. All strength and movement comes from ki in the body (which is interrelated with fascial strength), so a weight lifter can have 'strong ki', but he may not be able to manipulate that ki in the optimal way with his hara/middle/dantien. So if the aforementioned weight-lifter attacks someone who is skilled in 'internal strenght', there could be a mixing of forces which in turn defeats the weight-lifter. Hence, "Ai Ki".

I think this definition of Aiki is not in alignment with what most of those who practice Aikido would call Aiki.

Plus Aiki implying a mixing of Ki or mixing of ki strength . Who said that? Is that a personal view, an internal arts view?

It's an ancient and commonly used concept, Graham. While it's a revelation to most westerners, the concept of blending/mixing/combining with an opponent's "ki", it's a concept that has been around thousands of years. Reading the classics and being around Asian martial arts, Ueshiba would well have been acquainted with the term/idea. What's interesting is that once you understand the concept and think "Voila!", you begin to look around and say, "wait a minute.... I wonder if the old translation of 'using the opponent's strength' may have been more to the point of what they were saying?". In other words, there were lots of giveaways like "kuzushi" and "using the opponent's strength", but we all took them to mean the physical stuff that we could relate to in our own ignorance.

..."Fa Jin" is also sometimes loosely intermixed with "Fa Li". "Fa Jin" is literally "attack jin"; "Fa Li" is literally "attack strength".... the implication in both is a *whole body shaking issuance of strength*. "Li" by itself is just the word for strength and often implies normal muscular strength.

Walking back from the grocer's just a moment ago, I thought of a big point that differentiates the "internal" methods from "external" or "non-internal" forms. And that is that attacking methods in the "external" forms like most karate (I won't say "all" karate) cause damage to the outside of the opponent's body in order to damage the inside of his body. But internal forms can damage the inside of the opponent's body without making a mark or causing clear damage to the outside of the body (i.e., rupturing internal organs without breaking the protective bones around them).

What do you think?

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

It's an ancient and commonly used concept, Graham. While it's a revelation to most westerners, the concept of blending/mixing/combining with an opponent's "ki", it's a concept that has been around thousands of years. Reading the classics and being around Asian martial arts, Ueshiba would well have been acquainted with the term/idea. What's interesting is that once you understand the concept and think "Voila!", you begin to look around and say, "wait a minute.... I wonder if the old translation of 'using the opponent's strength' may have been more to the point of what they were saying?". In other words, there were lots of giveaways like "kuzushi" and "using the opponent's strength", but we all took them to mean the physical stuff that we could relate to in our own ignorance.

FWIW

Mike Sigman

That's what I question. The term, not the idea. I've seen it mentioned to do with 'some' arts way back and never exactly the same.

The mixing, blending, combining? These words may well have been used in certain arts in the past and even today but they are not the terms mostly used by O'Sensei and thus his meaning for AI KI or even Ki.

He most usually used the words harmonizing, harmonizes.

The logic that O'Sensei knew about these historical and oriental views means that's what he meant is what I always disagree with for to me it's patently obvious he didn't.

That's why I like to find out what your view of Aiki is as different from O'Senseis not to make yours wrong but to see the difference.

It's simple really. Aiki prior to his AIKIDO had a meaning obviously and was no doubt to do with to whatever degree what you say. That's all good and useful to know and do and thus help make sense of some of Aikido.

However, his explanations of Aiki and bu and Budo and Ki were different and it's that difference which made Aikido. Such is my view.

I'm also learning from this that there are descriptions of heart, thus desire leads mind leads ki etc. Once again I then understand where others get these Ideas from and no doubt these are old chinese concepts from various arts.

However I have never heard or read of O'Sensei or Koichi Tohei giving that sequence or holding that belief. In fact Tohei said the sequence is simply spirit-mind-body or ki-mind-body.

This indeed may have led to those old heated debates between chinese and japanese as to Ki being different to chi.

This will at least give you how some in Aikido relate to Aiki and thus see other views of it as different and belonging to something else, whether it helps Aikido or not.

The mixing, blending, combining? These words may well have been used in certain arts in the past and even today but they are not the terms mostly used by O'Sensei and thus his meaning for AI KI or even Ki.

He most usually used the words harmonizing, harmonizes.

Well, Ueshiba did sometimes use the term "harmonize", but much more often that's a mistranslation of the kanji for "Ai", which doesn't really mean "harmonize" in the sense that native English speakers usually use it.

Walking back from the grocer's just a moment ago, I thought of a big point that differentiates the "internal" methods from "external" or "non-internal" forms. And that is that attacking methods in the "external" forms like most karate (I won't say "all" karate) cause damage to the outside of the opponent's body in order to damage the inside of his body. But internal forms can damage the inside of the opponent's body without making a mark or causing clear damage to the outside of the body (i.e., rupturing internal organs without breaking the protective bones around them).

What do you think?

I think that it's a separate discussion, David. I know *why* "internal strength" can do these things, but since I know it will be something "taught for the last 20 years" by some people, I leave it for them to explain now rather than after the fact.

Well, Ueshiba did sometimes use the term "harmonize", but much more often that's a mistranslation of the kanji for "Ai", which doesn't really mean "harmonize" in the sense that native English speakers usually use it.

Actually, Chris, "combine" is perfect for what he meant. Or "vector addition". The problem becomes, as you can see, that the intention of the words is often very clean, but the knowledge of the translator is often very sparse. Once a translator understands the gist of jin/kokyu, a lot of these seeming mysteries boil down not to the "hidden secrets", but to the translator's lack of background.

The mixing, blending, combining? These words may well have been used in certain arts in the past and even today but they are not the terms mostly used by O'Sensei and thus his meaning for AI KI or even Ki.

He most usually used the words harmonizing, harmonizes.

Wait, wait. The fact is he didn't use "harmonizing" or "harmonizes" at all! He used Japanese words, and you are talking about somebody's translations of that. Plus he used religious terminology. And he used references to the ancient literature. It is questionable for those of us who don't speak Japanese to say that "harmonize" is the correct translation and mix, blend, or combine are incorrect. But beyond the language issue, there is still far from a "correct answer" due to the strange terminology he used.

I don't want to put words in O-sensei's mouth. I don't have any agenda. But I really think we have a lot of work to do regarding understanding what he meant. So we do need to have these conversations. And we need to trace the kind of things that he said through a lot of mess in order to arrive at good translations.

Looking at the traditional meanings of neijin-related terms that O-sensei would have read is a good way to do it, and the cultural, historical, and religious analysis that people like Peter Goldsbury, Stan Pranin, and Ellis Amdur do is also an important and necessary task.

Well, Ueshiba did sometimes use the term "harmonize", but much more often that's a mistranslation of the kanji for "Ai", which doesn't really mean "harmonize" in the sense that native English speakers usually use it.

Best,

Chris

Says who? I know of times he said so maybe even five times in one explanation.

No mistranslation. I don't buy this historian knows best logic. Historians gather data and should just give their data, which Stanley Pranin for example is good at. His opinion however or any persons opinion given to him is that only. Any conclusions drawn are coloured by the personal beliefs and understandings.

Kanji can mean this and that. One word can have many meanings. Mostly I've seen that just as a way of avoiding what he said because people including those there at the time didn't understand what the word means even if he was to print it on their heads. They can't relate it to what he did so he must mean something else type of logic.

Some or even much of what he said was either translated by someone close to him, in the same time as he was saying it and who understood English very well thank you very much. No looking back years later, no lack of understanding him as a person, no Kanji.

Finally, using Ai when I was explaining Ki and what he said about Ki in respect to harmony shows another misinterpretation in english let alone japanese. ( a response to Mikes view of mixing ki, blending,)

Wait, wait. The fact is he didn't use "harmonizing" or "harmonizes" at all! He used Japanese words, and you are talking about somebody's translations of that. Plus he used religious terminology. And he used references to the ancient literature. It is questionable for those of us who don't speak Japanese to say that "harmonize" is the correct translation and mix, blend, or combine are incorrect. But beyond the language issue, there is still far from a "correct answer" due to the strange terminology he used.

I don't want to put words in O-sensei's mouth. I don't have any agenda. But I really think we have a lot of work to do regarding understanding what he meant. So we do need to have these conversations. And we need to trace the kind of things that he said through a lot of mess in order to arrive at good translations.

Looking at the traditional meanings of neijin-related terms that O-sensei would have read is a good way to do it, and the cultural, historical, and religious analysis that people like Peter Goldsbury, Stan Pranin, and Ellis Amdur do is also an important and necessary task.

Sorry Jonathan but he did say. Hikitsuchi could repeat much of what O'Sensei said word for word for example. No mistranslation.
Tohei spoke good English. His son made sure of the proper translations as he was there to translate.

When it comes to religion and people trying to analyse it and compare this way and that invariably they miss what's staring them in the face. How can they analyse love and compassion and humility when they don't even know what it is in their own language? I don't know of a religion where the major enlightened people of it didn't say and preach about the power of love and compassion ans spirit, call it holy spirit, prana or whatever. The same words in many languages given over and over as lessons that few discipline themselves to understand. No mistranslation.

I could take maybe ten sentences from a thirty sentence piece and ask someone to demonstrate it. Most couldn't. I suppose all ten sentences must have had different meanings then. mmmm. Don't think so. You can relate them to whenever, whoever, however but the fact is you don't understand them.

As a famous modern seer said in music, 'don't believe the hype..'
ha, ha.

Says who? I know of times he said so maybe even five times in one explanation.

No mistranslation. I don't buy this historian knows best logic. Historians gather data and should just give their data, which Stanley Pranin for example is good at. His opinion however or any persons opinion given to him is that only. Any conclusions drawn are coloured by the personal beliefs and understandings.

Kanji can mean this and that. One word can have many meanings. Mostly I've seen that just as a way of avoiding what he said because people including those there at the time didn't understand what the word means even if he was to print it on their heads. They can't relate it to what he did so he must mean something else type of logic.

Some or even much of what he said was either translated by someone close to him, in the same time as he was saying it and who understood English very well thank you very much. No looking back years later, no lack of understanding him as a person, no Kanji.

Finally, using Ai when I was explaining Ki and what he said about Ki in respect to harmony shows another misinterpretation in english let alone japanese. ( a response to Mikes view of mixing ki, blending,)

Regards.G.

Says me - a professional translator. I've read everything Morihei Ueshiba ever published in the original Japanese, and I've translated for a number of the principles. I'd be happy to discuss specifics, if you have examples and can understand Japanese.

But the fact is he said and , rather than specifically chosing "harmonize" instead of "combine" or "merge" or any other English term. The folks you mention translated as they did, that I will not argue, and there must have been some reason for the 10th dan rank promotions. But Tohei openly dismissed the way O-sensei presented his thoughts (in terms of kami, etc. see his interviews), so are we really entertaining the idea that Tohei fully respected the intricacies of the religious overtones in O-sensei's lectures? Combined with the famous "when I look back, no one is following me" comment from O-sensei, I do think it remains to be demonstrated if anyone ever has really understood and interpreted for us the entirety of what O-sensei said. Point being-- I don't see any one english term being correct when translating terms like aiki.

But... this is the non-aikido forum. The terms in the OP are the point. Mike, "aiki" and "IP" are the only terms in your list that are not directly related to Chinese (or older) usage. I get conceptually how aiki fits, but is there any direct link just in terms of terminology?

Says who? I know of times he said so maybe even five times in one explanation.

No mistranslation. I don't buy this historian knows best logic. Historians gather data and should just give their data, which Stanley Pranin for example is good at. His opinion however or any persons opinion given to him is that only. Any conclusions drawn are coloured by the personal beliefs and understandings.

Kanji can mean this and that. One word can have many meanings. Mostly I've seen that just as a way of avoiding what he said because people including those there at the time didn't understand what the word means even if he was to print it on their heads. They can't relate it to what he did so he must mean something else type of logic.

Some or even much of what he said was either translated by someone close to him, in the same time as he was saying it and who understood English very well thank you very much. No looking back years later, no lack of understanding him as a person, no Kanji.

Finally, using Ai when I was explaining Ki and what he said about Ki in respect to harmony shows another misinterpretation in english let alone japanese. ( a response to Mikes view of mixing ki, blending,)

Regards.G.

Are you saying that you think Ueshiba's concept of aiki was different from everyone elses? He felt that his aiki, when he was calling it aiki-jujitsu, aiki-bujitsu, or aiki-budo and especially when someone else named it aikido for him, was different than Takeda's when he started calling it aiki-jujitsu? Or when Sagawa mentions his father taking notes about what Takeda was teaching them and writing "apply aiki here", that this was all somehow different than what Ueshiba, who learned of aiki from the same place, considered his aiki to be?

But Tohei openly dismissed the way O-sensei presented his thoughts (in terms of kami, etc. see his interviews), so are we really entertaining the idea that Tohei fully respected the intricacies of the religious overtones in O-sensei's lectures?

Good point and it speaks to Graham's interpretation of kokyu as universal love. Kokyu has to do with a special type of trained force skill and you can call it love or donkey or lemonade, but it is what it is, despite any terminology changes. Tohei was saying that in his interview where Ueshiba referred to Kami but Tohei dismissed it as simply dropping of the center. In that case they could both do a certain I.S. trick and knew how to do it, but Ueshiba artificially painted the trick with Kami. Was he wrong to do so? Who cares, as long as he could do the trick correctly? If he couldn't do the trick correctly but did something else and called it Kami, that would not make it the same I.S. trick. The same idea holds true with calling "Kokyu" "universal love"..... the discussion is moot unless actual kokyu skill is being used, isn't it?

Are you saying that you think Ueshiba's concept of aiki was different from everyone elses? He felt that his aiki, when he was calling it aiki-jujitsu, aiki-bujitsu, or aiki-budo and especially when someone else named it aikido for him, was different than Takeda's when he started calling it aiki-jujitsu? Or when Sagawa mentions his father taking notes about what Takeda was teaching them and writing "apply aiki here", that this was all somehow different than what Ueshiba, who learned of aiki from the same place, considered his aiki to be?

Yes. I am.

So does everyone else who was there at the time. Why do you think he was such a phenomenon? Because it was the same ?

Most admit they didn't understand him and they all spoke Japanese. So obviously it was not only different but outside of their definitions of Aiki.

How can you take a 'fact' like someone gave him the name 'Aikido' and say that means x,y,z? That thinking treats him like an idiot as if he would just accept any name and wasn't too interested.

Basically, the past to do with fighting you can understand and 'physical ki' you can sort of get but that's as far as most go. Just admit he went much further than that and stated it was nothing to do with the thinking of the past or how you would like to translate it so you could relate it to other things.

Every time he was asked if it's like this or that in judo, or if he learned it from Takeda, or if it's sen no sen, etc. he answered no.
Maybe translaters can't translate no.

But the fact is he said and , rather than specifically chosing "harmonize" instead of "combine" or "merge" or any other English term. The folks you mention translated as they did, that I will not argue, and there must have been some reason for the 10th dan rank promotions. But Tohei openly dismissed the way O-sensei presented his thoughts (in terms of kami, etc. see his interviews), so are we really entertaining the idea that Tohei fully respected the intricacies of the religious overtones in O-sensei's lectures? Combined with the famous "when I look back, no one is following me" comment from O-sensei, I do think it remains to be demonstrated if anyone ever has really understood and interpreted for us the entirety of what O-sensei said. Point being-- I don't see any one english term being correct when translating terms like aiki.

But... this is the non-aikido forum. The terms in the OP are the point. Mike, "aiki" and "IP" are the only terms in your list that are not directly related to Chinese (or older) usage. I get conceptually how aiki fits, but is there any direct link just in terms of terminology?

The folks translated as they did because they were there and understood the context and tones with which he was speaking so you cannot get better, plus they trained with him and were entrusted to do so by him.

You can search for something that someone ie: Tohei, dismissed and try to use that to serve some idea if you like and then everyone can say 'even Tohei said' How silly can you get.

It wasn't Toheis way of presentation. Tohei was not of that religion. So it's obvious rather than an example. The one connecting factor that led Tohei, Hikitsuchi and others TO understand him was that they did a spiritual practice.

There's one famous teacher who explains quite clearly the reasons why he and others couldn't understand what O'Sensei was on about and says it was because of the time difference and not knowing or understanding the old religious tales etc. He then goes on to say he finally understood only after studying zen, a spiritual activity. Others will know of whom I speak as I can't remember exactly who that was.

It's not a matter of translating a word literally it's a matter of understanding conceptually. To understand conceptually you thus have to increase your spiritual awareness.

Good point and it speaks to Graham's interpretation of kokyu as universal love. Kokyu has to do with a special type of trained force skill and you can call it love or donkey or lemonade, but it is what it is, despite any terminology changes. Tohei was saying that in his interview where Ueshiba referred to Kami but Tohei dismissed it as simply dropping of the center. In that case they could both do a certain I.S. trick and knew how to do it, but Ueshiba artificially painted the trick with Kami. Was he wrong to do so? Who cares, as long as he could do the trick correctly? If he couldn't do the trick correctly but did something else and called it Kami, that would not make it the same I.S. trick. The same idea holds true with calling "Kokyu" "universal love"..... the discussion is moot unless actual kokyu skill is being used, isn't it?

The folks translated as they did because they were there and understood the context and tones with which he was speaking so you cannot get better, plus they trained with him and were entrusted to do so by him.

The general rule of translation is that you always translate into your native language. The reason being that, even for very good non-native speakers, it's just too easy to slip up on the nuances.

Yes and it's used in other Japanese arts, also, and I'll guarantee you that the karate and koryu styles that do use the term didn't get it from Aikido. If nothing else, a commonly known (in the Aikido world) example would be the basic jin/kokyu things that Ikeda Sensei got from Ushiro (karate). Then too, other terms were also used to describe the various ki skills in Japanese martial-arts (Reiki pops to mind as another term for Kokyu).

Frankly, given the fact that Ueshiba came from a very traditional culture, I don't think that there would be much tolerance for people using traditional terms in any way that they see fit. It just wouldn't fly; there wasn't that "words mean what I want them to mean", etc., that you see in a lot of the current western counter-culture.